The disclosure was made in one of a series of reports responding to the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board’s tentative plan to clean up the neighborhood since harmful chemicals were found there about two years ago.

But a solution to the 44-acre community’s ills still seems out of reach.

The water board, which is the agency in charge of overseeing the cleanup, said it would come forward with a tentative work plan by Sept. 15 to clean up the area north of Lomita Boulevard, between Marbella and Panama avenues.

An earlier rough plan from the water board elicited criticism from attorneys representing residents living in the neighborhood and Shell Oil, the company that left the oil on the property when it sold it to Lomita Development Co. in 1966.

Shell now argues that Lomita Development Co. had agreed to remove the concrete remains of storage tanks used to hold oil when the site was used as an oil tank farm from 1924 to 1966.

Letters between the developer and Shell officials in 1965 and 1966 describe details of how the concrete slabs would be removed or broken up by Lomita Development Co.

“It appears to have been Developer Parties’ decision (among other things) to leave the reinforced concrete reservoir floor in the ground,” Shell officials wrote. “If there is currently petroleum-impacted soil above the concrete floor and at depths as shallow as two or three feet, it could only be there as a result of the developer’s activities in filling and grading the site.”

Shell officials also disagreed with a number of findings made by the water board, including broad statements about the level of danger to residents’ health, which Shell contends is minor – based on testing done at about a third of the homes. Testing is ongoing.

Water board findings “consist almost entirely of maximum concentrations,” Shell officials wrote. “However, maximum concentrations are not representative of conditions across the entire site.”

But for attorneys at the Los Angeles law firm Girardi and Keese, which is representing residents, the maximum concentrations are of the utmost importance. Furthermore, attorneys argue that Shell is skewing test results.

“There are serious issues of instances where Shell has under-reported significant facts or data,” attorney Tom Girardi wrote in a letter to the water board.

Girardi said Shell reported 3.4 feet of standing crude oil accumulation in one area, while investigators working for the attorneys found 10 feet of oil in the same area.

The only solution, Girardi said, is to relocate the residents, remove the homes and clean all the soil to 30 feet below ground.

“Contaminant depths vary across small distances, and therefore, data collected from a front and back yard have no bearing on what is occurring beneath a house,” Girardi wrote. This “makes it necessary that any remedial effort be … able to handle the worst case scenario.”

Paul Rosenfeld, of the environmental consulting firm Soil Water Air Protection Enterprise, agreed with Girardi in his analysis of data.

While Shell and water board officials have maintained that testing results have found above-acceptable levels of benzene, methane and other chemicals in the soil, they said the danger to human health is extremely slight.

Concentrations of chemicals are mostly underground, and, while dangerous vapors have been found above ground, they quickly dissipate, according to a report from Geosyntec Consultants, which was hired by Shell.

Carson city officials agreed with Shell representatives that more soil testing should be done before a work plan is finalized.

“There have been initial comments suggesting that the Carousel neighborhood should be abandoned,” Carson Hazardous Substances Engineer Robert Romero wrote. “We sincerely hope that this option is not necessary. We trust that the Regional Board and responsible regulatory agencies will facilitate the identification of remedial systems that will optimize the removal of harmful contaminants.”

Join the Conversation

We invite you to use our commenting platform to engage in insightful conversations about issues in our community. Although we do not pre-screen comments, we reserve the right at all times to remove any information or materials that are unlawful, threatening, abusive, libelous, defamatory, obscene, vulgar, pornographic, profane, indecent or otherwise objectionable to us, and to disclose any information necessary to satisfy the law, regulation, or government request. We might permanently block any user who abuses these conditions.

If you see comments that you find offensive, please use the “Flag as Inappropriate” feature by hovering over the right side of the post, and pulling down on the arrow that appears. Or, contact our editors by emailing moderator@scng.com.